GMA falsely claimed Obama was making "his first trip to the war zones"
July 18, 2008 12:19 pm ET
During the July 18 edition of ABC's Good Morning America, anchor Robin Roberts falsely claimed that Sen. Barack Obama's planned visit to Iraq and Afghanistan was "his first trip to the war zones." In fact, Obama has made a previous visit to Iraq as part of a January 2006 Middle East trip that also included stops in Israel and Jordan.
From the July 18 edition of ABC's Good Morning America:
ROBERTS: This morning, overseas mission. Barack Obama, set to make a high-profile tour abroad, his first trip to the war zones. Can he convince voters, and the world, that he's stronger on national security than John McCain?
Expand All
Expand 1st Level
Collapse All
Reporters like Robin Roberts should always do homework, or have some aides help them do the homework, before reporting on an issue like this. All the networks are sending reporters with Obama to go on this overseas trip, so there's no excuse for not having plenty of background info about Obama and trips like this at hand.
So, how could she have gotten it wrong?
Conservative misinformation. It's info that not's accurate, credible or reliable and it forwards the conservative agenda that Obama hasn't made the 'correct' number of trips to this area of the world, and it hints at the fact that he might not have enough years in service to be the next Commander in Chief, when visits to this area are not a requisite to being qualified and he has made another trip there. Making visits to war zones doesn't make a person strong on national security!
But she formed it as a question! "Can he convince voters, and the world, that he's stronger on national security than John McCain?" Well, he can't convince the voters that won't vote for him in any case, but if you'd stop lying about how many visits he has made and you stop acting like those visits are a qualification for being strong on national security, he might be able to convince voters! Stop sabotaging him, Robin.
GMA was 100 percent correct!!!!
This is so simple, I cant believe you all keep missing it. He has never been to Afghanistan. GMA was talking about Irag and Afghanistan. The war ZONES!! How simple could it be?????
In Senator McGramps defense he has been to a war, Vietnam. There are rumors he was the bugle boy serving with Teddy Rosevelt in Mexico.
"STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER
By DORI MEINERT
WASHINGTON - In his first 12 hours in Iraq, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., said Saturday he saw or heard little to change his views about the significant obstacles that remain to stabilize that country.
While Iraqi President Jalal Talabani predicted that a national unity government could be formed within weeks, Obama said he thought "it may take a little bit longer."
In a conference call with reporters back home, Obama also reiterated his view that "if we have not seen significant progress over the next few months, we need to have an honest conversation with Iraqis as to what our investment is."
Obama, who is a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is spending two days in Iraq as part of his weeklong congressionally sponsored tour of the Middle East. It's his first trip to the region and the second foreign trip of his brief U.S. Senate career.
Last fall, the freshman senator called for a phased troop withdrawal from Iraq and criticized the Bush administration for questioning the patriotism of critics of his war policy."
How is it that Good Morning America missed this obvious fact? Where are they getting their information??!!!
How is it that Good Morning America missed this obvious fact? Where are they getting their information??!!!
I am getting the feeling ABC has been in McCains camp for awhile now. I do not really fault Robin Roberts, this was a women who I do not think is very intelligent, she used to do Sports Center on ESPN, they are not the brightest people. She reads what her corporate bosses tell her to read.
she used to do Sports Center on ESPN, they are not the brightest people
Exactly look at the moron on MSNBC at 8pm eastern time who smeared Hillary Clinton for months during the primary.
Jlyons,
Does your criticism of ESPN announcers also apply to Keith Olbermann? :-)
This is just an outright lie , GMA and Roberts should open up Mondays show apologizing for the error. It is lies like this and the lies that Obama is a Muslim that give the wrong impression.
ROBERTS: This morning, overseas mission. Barack Obama, set to make a high-profile tour abroad, his first trip to the war zones. Can he convince voters, and the world, that he's stronger on national security than John McCain?
Iraq not Afghanistan
http://abclocal.go.com/wls/story?section=news/local&id=3794382
Wrong, plural means both you idiot.
You are not worth my time debating .
Point of View
Sueeld is not wrong, ABC is wrong. When you say you have not been to the warzones you are implying that he has not been to either. She should have said this is Obamas first trip to Afghanistan but he has visisted Iraq back in 2006 or something like that.
As if people watching are going to interpret that comment as meaning "He's been to one war zone". It's obviously misleading, since it's more logical to think of the zones collectively for these purposes. They should have said "both war zones", or just "Afghanistan", and that would have cleared up any confusion.
So... it would be accurate to say that John McCain has not attended hearings on the war zones in the last two years?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/07/hearing-gate-ex.html
POV
I normally support your views...but I can't on this one. If your argument is just for arguments sake...go for it...mmfa makes the same type of case that you're making over and over.
Robert's statement was not accurate...but I won't go so far as to attach it to some rightwing plot...but the implication was quite clear to me...Obama had not visited any war zones.
Sorry, pal.
-- This thread is about a media show that intentionally, mis represented the travel record -- pitthaughn
Whoa nelson...the statement was patently false...yet you have nothing more than supposition to label it intentional and part of some right wing cabal.
Your own spectacles might need their prescription checked.
parse much, dumba$$?
Holy cow...if you want to play word games, "bring it on".
Sue:
POV is just a jackass troll who likes to argue. He's probably one of those clowns who poked fun at President Clinton for parsing words, and yet here he is doing the same thing. But then again, there are different rules for the citizens of Planet Wingnut ... :)
SGD,
It must be nice to make up things about other posters without any substantiation so you can generalize your putdowns to whole groups.
I think in this case, the bell trolls for thee. :-)
<snark> Come on, it IS his first trip to the war zoneS... </snark>
Froggy, don't look now, but the point you were making to be snarky has been picked up by PointofView. Except he's not kidding.
Once again, the rightys demonstrate why it's so hard to parody them. They can always outdo the silliest satire.
funny!
Shrub managed to miss a trip to the boomer war zone. McCain spent many years in that war zone but didn't seem to learn enough, since he's still supporting the military industrial media complex.
I haven't been to the "war zones" but have enough sense to know how stupid this stone age way of solving conflict is.
Mary,
As an alternative, perhaps we can get you to sit down with Osama Bin Laden/Hezzbollah/Iranian Mullahs and do a two-out-of-three rock/paper/scissors? :-)
No, unlike alot of conservatives, I think America is very strong, and certainly doesn't face an existential threat from either Al Qaeda or Iran.
We could be doing a much better job of winning, however.
So they are winning?
It's been 7 years since 9/11 and Osama is still alive and breathing. What do YOU think?
Seeing as how he has for 7 years lived under a rock, what do you think?
I think Bush is a idiot, liar and too dumb to breathe.
I think anytime the man that caused the worst terrorist attack on American soil is allowed to remind us via tape that he's still alive is a day we have lost in killing those responsible for 9/11. But don't worry, Saddam is dead.
Oh and don't forget, he lived under a rock long before 9/11.
Pearlene,
So you advocate invading Pakistan to root out OBL?
Just how would you go about denying him any more days under that rock?
"Turn the other cheek" is a courageous act which if really applied would let all the steam out of one's enemy, as negativity feeds on resistance. Whilst turning the cheek, demonstrate the correct way to behave...A positive vision feeds the world; threats and violence continue a long road of cause and effect, lasting through generations.
Now this is of course a very radical way to behave "in this world." There are occasions where taking up the sword to defend one's self, family or country is the only course of action. (But not nearly as often as it's been applied.) However, most wars have been promoted by a small cabal who profit greatly, while those who suffer and die are manipulated into fighting them.
Mary,
We only disagree as to the occasions where taking up the sword to defend one's self, family or country is the only course of action.
Sometimes one has to sacrifice for the good of others. Unfortunately those terrorists who blow up innocent children, women, and men cannot be reasoned with. In my opinion, cutting and running will cause more death and destruction than by staying and stamping them out.
This is a cartoon. Staying and stomping who out? When there are more than a dozen groups of people fighting in Iraq the U.S. soldiers are unable to sort them out. Iraqis know who the "foreign fighters" are and will probably quickly eliminate them once they are in charge of their own country again. U.S. soldiers wind up in the middle of a shooting gallery, chasing ghosts.
Any foreign occupier is frustrated by a guerilla war, it's the least "winnable" situation. Look at how our own country defeated an empire with a larger trained army.
Under a rock? This from ABC News, September 2006:
Osama bin Laden, America's most wanted man, will not face capture in Pakistan if he agrees to lead a "peaceful life," Pakistani officials tell ABC News.
Actually, in a sense al Qaeda has been winning. Their stated mission has been to get the US bogged down in an unwinnable war int he middle east that drained their resources and demoralized their citizenry, similar to what they did to the USSR in Afghanistan. That's one point for them. Another stated goal was to get the US bases out of Saudi Arabia. Bush removed them shortly after 9/11, that's two. They also would love to see our society started eating away at ourselves from the inside, becoming more and more paraniod and denying our own citizens their rights and freedoms in an attempt to keep the terrorists from denying them their rights and freedoms. That's three. It looks like 3-0 from my count, thanks to our pathetically incompetant administration and their bed-wetting supporters.
Jaw,
Any link to that "stated mission"?
Mary,
Thanks for the link but it does not say anything about Obama's mission statement.
It simply says he wanted oil to be $144 a barrel. Now that the price is flirting with it do you think Obama and his group will lay down their arms and go home?
I've noticed that in just about every communication Obama creates a new grievance as his reason d'etra.
Mary,
Thanks for the link but it does not say anything about Obama's mission statement.
It simply says he wanted oil to be $144 a barrel. Now that the price is flirting with it do you think Obama and his group will lay down their arms and go home?
I've noticed that in just about every communication Obama creates a new grievance as his reason d'etra. - AA
Everyone notice how successful the right wing echo chamber has been? This is why the instances of "misspeaking" like conflating Osama and Obama must be confronted every time it happens.
You are sad AA. Maybe you should stick to your "maths". Oh, and it's "raison d'etre".
Thanks for noting the typo. My apologies. I meant Osama bin Laden.
Why must you turn this site into a HOUSE OF LIES!? =>
Seriously, once would be a typo - three times?
Listening/watching too many right wing blowhards has led you to conflate the two. Don't blame your fingers...
Who cares if this is his first, second or 10th trip.
Bring 'em home damnit!!!
Robin Roberts falsely claimed that Sen. Barack Obama's planned visit to Iraq and Afghanistan was "his first trip to the war zones."
We currently have TWO war zones where American soldiers are dying, Iraq and Afghanistan. Since Obama has been to Iraq GMA is WRONG!
Does it really matter if it is his first or his second trip?
It looks like to a lot of us that Obama was goaded into this trip by the McCain camp criticizing his position regarding Iraq.
I forget now.. If elected, is Obama going to stay there and win or cut and run over 16 months? Not to worry. I'll go outside and check the wind direction and get back to you with the latest answer. :-)
Riddle me this, Batman.. :)
How many right-wingers does it take to screw in a lightbulb??
It looks like to a lot of us that Obama was goaded into this trip by the McCain camp criticizing his position regarding Iraq. - AA
If only there was somewhere you could go to find out if you were getting the right information!
Craig,
I never said Obama hadn't considered it. I simply said he was goaded into going by McCain.
It may not be the case, but it looks like it to me.
Why?
It must be nice to make up things ... without any substantiation...- anotheramerican / Friday July 18, 2008 3:05:36 PM EDT
Because it's nice ! ;0)
McCain also predicted today that Obama will land in Iraq soon, may be this weekend. If he Obama does go to Iraq this weekend, does it mean he was goaded into visiting Iraq this weekend?
http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN1819664920080718?pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=10112
And when, or why, has McCain turned into Obama's travel agent?
AA, each time you post this crap you appear as dumb the other right wing talking heads.
YOU cannot define what "winning" is yet you feel that leaving is "cutting and running". Since you won't know when you'll win, how can you say anyone will "cut and run"?
YOU like many of your right wing friends didn't bother to sign up for this war you love but you have no problem with other people's children dying while YOU decide what "winning" means. Buy A Clue, the Iraqi government wants a "timetable" for our withdrawal. They want us out! The only idiots who want us there are folks like you who STILL can't decide exactly what "winning" means. I suggest you and your right wing friends suit up and fight cause you look pretty cowardly sitting here in the comfort of you home calling someone else a coward.
Now it's Friday and I have a bingo and wine date but I'll be back later.
Bingo! I see you're cutting and running yourself. :-) Hope you win.
Maybe you should hold off on some of the pre-game vino as you are making assumptions not on what I wrote but on some magical scorecard you keep in your purse.
I never said I couldn't define victory.
Correct me if I am wrong, but by your post you seem to be expressing the idea that only those who go to Iraq can hold views in favor of winning. That is about as ludicrous as saying anyone who enjoys bingo has no right to be against the war.
Are we not both citizens of this country? Do we not both enjoy freedom of speech to express our views or is it only those who agree with you have the right? Had I been to Iraq would that make my views any more valid?
However I'm willing to compromise. You enlist and go to Iraq then so will I. :-)
ps. God bless all our soldiers who have volunteered to serve our country and the sacrifices they and their families make to help protect us while they fight for freedom and democracy around the world.
God bless all our soldiers who have volunteered to serve our country and the sacrifices they and their families make to help protect us while they fight for freedom and democracy around the world.
A slight modification:
God bless all our soldiers who have volunteered to serve our country and the sacrifices they and their families make to help protect us while they fight for freedom and democracy around the world [and for oil companies].
"However I'm willing to compromise. You enlist and go to Iraq then so will I. :-) " AA
Two problems with your witty remark: Pearline is 76 years old, and she is not in favor of our occupation.
Mary,
The problems are not with my remark. :-)
A very slight point, AA. You're insane. But have a nice day ;-)
Correct me if I am wrong, but by your post you seem to be expressing the idea that only those who go to Iraq can hold views in favor of winning. That is about as ludicrous as saying anyone who enjoys bingo has no right to be against the war.
AA, we didn't find WMD's, Iraq wasn't apart of 9/11, Saddam is gone, Iraq has a "Democratic" government and army we're done! Why are we STILL in Iraq? WHAT else do you want American soldiers to do? It's time they came home, period! You want them to stay but you don't say what "winning" is for you. I say they've won, come home and since you want them to stay I think you should go over there and help them "win" for you.
Are we not both citizens of this country? Do we not both enjoy freedom of speech to express our views or is it only those who agree with you have the right? Had I been to Iraq would that make my views any more valid?
Of course you have the right to express your views and I have the right to disagree. Had you been in Iraq I seriously doubt you'd still hold your current views and please don't tell me you know someone who's been there and they think like you. Each individual has a totally different feeling when they experience Iraq first hand.
However I'm willing to compromise. You enlist and go to Iraq then so will I. :-)
I want every soldier in Iraq home therefore my effort will be focused on bringing them home. Since you want them to stay till you decided what "winning" is, you should join the soldiers and fight till you decide we've won. No sitting on the sideline for you. :-)
ps. God bless all our soldiers who have volunteered to serve our country and the sacrifices they and their families make to help protect us while they fight for freedom and democracy around the world.
AA, "how they fight for freedom and democracy around the world"? THAT is what you think our military is for? You think it's clever to say god bless and then add that crap? I bet you won't tell any active soldiers about bringing democracy around the world on the backs of the military, they'd probably want slap you silly. Military use is a LAST option and there job is not to go around the world "bringing democracy" it's to protect THIS country.
I say God bless the men and women of our military, may January 2009 come sooner before the current nut commander in chief starts another war.
In addition, Martha Raddatz reported this morning that troops in Iraq don't want to come home. (ABC - Good Morning America, interview with GMA anchor Chris Cuomo).
What? Our troops don't want to come home? Really?
Craig,
Just a guess...
Sen. John McCain strongly criticized Sen. Barack Obama Wednesday for not visiting Iraq in more than two years and for turning down the Arizona senator's suggestion that the two should make a joint trip to the country.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/28/campaign.wrap/"Sen. Obama has been to Iraq once -- a little over two years ago he went and he has never seized the opportunity except in a hearing to meet with Gen. [David] Petraeus," McCain said at a campaign event in Reno, Nevada. "My friends, this is about leadership and learning."
Again raising the issue of Obama's willingness to meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, McCain also said of the Illinois senator, "He wants to sit down with the president of Iran but hasn't yet sat down with Gen. Petraeus, the leader of our troops in Iraq?"
Obama last visited Iraq in January, 2006 for a two-day tour of the country.
McCain's comments come the same day the Republican National Committee launched a clock on its Web site noting how many days it has been since Obama traveled to Iraq, and three days after his supporter Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, suggested the presumed Republican nominee and Obama tour the country together. Video Watch more of McCain's criticism of Obama »
Yes, McCain did try to goad Obama. But why did you believe that is the reason for the trip, when Obama has been saying for a while that he was considering going?
Craig,
Because he offered no plans to go until goaded by McCain.... (deja vu all over again!)
It's been a nice ride. However wWe are now back at the station. Please lift the bar and exit to the right. :-)
Because he offered no plans to go until goaded by McCain.... It's been a nice ride. However wWe are now back at the station (AA)
That feeling you have, AA? Like going around on a carnival ride? That's a very common result of trying to discuss things based on logical fallacies.Several could apply to your reasoning, but it's primarily a Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc angle you're using. (I know others have tried to help you with these problems with logic, and I don't expect you to check the link, I'm just doing my due diligence)
For a hunch or an opinion, that's perfectly acceptable. To state anything as a fact based on that reasoning is pretty feeble. You could just as convincingly assert that Obama was planning to go to the Mid-East because the Terrorist Convention is held during the summer, or because pixies whispered into his ear, goading him to go.
Your "feelings" are just fine for arguing certain things; where you and your wife go to dinner, what color shirt you'll wear today. Just don't make the mistake of thinking that if others can't prove your feelings about actual events "wrong", that makes them reality. It's a trap that too many fall into on this site.
“Correct me if I am wrong, but by your post you seem to be expressing the idea that only those who go to Iraq can hold views in favor of winning. That is about as ludicrous as saying anyone who enjoys bingo has no right to be against the war.”
No but isn't it interesting how often those strongest in favor of a war of choice are those who have refused their chance to go?
“Had I been to Iraq would that make my views any more valid?”
No but they would have seemed less hypocritical.
“However I'm willing to compromise. You enlist and go to Iraq then so will I. :-)”
I've already been (to Afghanistan) so how about you go now?
Rob,
Do you have any proof of your assertion that those who are strongest in favor of a war of choice are those who have refused to go?
It is the same argument, only dressed differently, that Pearlene made.
Besides being impossible to prove, it is like saying that those strongest in favor of tax increases won't pay them. Are they being hypocrites too?
Aren't all wars, wars of choice?
Oh and you are wrong if you are referring to me. I never refused to go.
ps. You didn't make it clear why you were in Afghanistan. Were you in the service? Was it recently? Were you drafted or did you enlist? Do you want to win in Afghanistan?
Oh, and by your logic, it is hypocritical for you too to want to win in Iraq since you were not sent there. I'm guessing it is because you 'refused' to go. ;-)